Author Topic: What's The Most Efficient Practice Method? (Read 22008 times)

Bertie South · « **Reply #15 on:** February 17, 2016, 04:23:02 pm »

Nadav, what do you consider talent to be? Is talent being good at something, or the potential to be good at something?

Nadav · « **Reply #16 on:** February 19, 2016, 02:30:19 am »

Talent = genetically inherited trait or set of traits that give someone an advantage at some activity

Bertie South · « **Reply #17 on:** February 19, 2016, 04:21:06 pm »

I'm not convinced such a thing exists. I don't mean to say I'm convinced it doesn't exist, just that.. how the hell could you be sure? What form would genetic traits for particular strengths take? I assume there's a not a guitar-playing gene, so.. what? A musical ability gene? A gene for particularly acute perception of sound?

When I was discussing that Flow book with a friend he mentioned this story. This inclines me against the notion of talent as a genetic trait. I also remember there being an anecdote in the book about a guy who, after 3-4 years of attending classical performances as a child, suddenly had an epiphany one day and went from loathing them to loving them. How does that happen? How would we have any way of knowing what was going on below the surface for the several years prior to that day?

My hunch - and it is purely a hunch - is that you can't be born with, say, a gift for music, but that a child could easily, without deliberate intention or awareness, develop one or more of the abilities (even in a completely different context) that also happen to contribute to musical proficiency.

Marrow Machines · « **Reply #18 on:** February 19, 2016, 06:13:34 pm »

Quote from: Bertie South on February 19, 2016, 04:21:06 pm

I'm not convinced such a thing exists. I don't mean to say I'm convinced it doesn't exist, just that.. how the hell could you be sure? What form would genetic traits for particular strengths take? I assume there's a not a guitar-playing gene, so.. what? A musical ability gene? A gene for particularly acute perception of sound?

When I was discussing that Flow book with a friend he mentioned this story. This inclines me against the notion of talent as a genetic trait. I also remember there being an anecdote in the book about a guy who, after 3-4 years of attending classical performances as a child, suddenly had an epiphany one day and went from loathing them to loving them. How does that happen? How would we have any way of knowing what was going on below the surface for the several years prior to that day?

My hunch - and it is purely a hunch - is that you can't be born with, say, a gift for music, but that a child could easily, without deliberate intention or awareness, develop one or more of the abilities (even in a completely different context) that also happen to contribute to musical proficiency.

it's a bit of both man. you are the creation of what was of the past, you are what you were brought up to be, and you are what you choose to be.

this situation is often a topic of discussion among my friend and i. it draws upon the concept of "metacognition", basically how do we actually learn and utilize what we have learned give different situations. There's a study out there that talks about the differences in problem solving approaches between geometry students and a math teacher who hasn't had geometry in years. The efficiency in failing and reapplying understood techniques to solve the problem.

that aside, i've done some more research on the topic of talent and practice. They are in fact intertwined, and especially at a younger age.

Here's my point; the younger you start something, the more proficient you will be over a life time of repeating that action. You play piano from 3-90, you're gonna be grand master sweg.

Quote

But how does talent develop? Unfortunately, many people have an overly simplistic understanding of talent. They view talent as innate, ready to spring forth given the right conditions. But this is not how talent operates. Gareth Bale wasn't born with the ability to score memorable goals. Talents aren't prepackaged at birth, but take time to develop.

SOURCE

it does in fact exist, but you have to bring out your predisposition of life experience to utilize what you're best at.

i was talking to a professional mechanical engineer over mardi gras break, and he said this

Quote

You may not know what you're good at until some one tells you what you're good at

Basically, it only becomes real when you start to tap into it and begin practicing and working hard.

Nadav · « **Reply #19 on:** February 19, 2016, 07:06:31 pm »

Yeah, there's a feedback aspect to it: a more talented person will see greater results from practicing and thus be more encouraged to continue practicing. A less talented person will have a harder time and will be more inclined to give up.

Determining which genes are good for running is tricky, but to a limited extent since we can see and physically determine all the parts needed to run fast (skeletal, muscular, neurological, etc.--and beyond a basic level, self-control and bio-feedback). It's trickier of course to determine which genes are good for music because so much of it is exclusively in the mind. Obviously you need fast muscles in your fingers and wrists to be good at guitar, and a fast two-way connection between these and your eyes (if you're reading music), but it gets more nebulous when you get into stuff like creativity and "musical ear". There may not be a single set of genes that influences these things, but genes definitely have an impact. (We know this from adoption studies, twin-raised-apart studies, etc.) Just because we don't know exactly which genes are responsible for a given talent, or whether it's the same set of genes for that talent every time, doesn't mean the effect isn't real.

Also keep in mind that while genes are physical things that come in a limited number of combinations, the activity at which one might be talented is also nebulous and dynamic. A hundred years ago a good hockey player didn't have to worry about passing the puck forward, and he wasn't allowed to use a curved stick. Would a talented hockey player from 1916 transported into the future 100 years be talented today? Most likely, but he might find that a few of his talents don't quite align to the game the way it's currently played. In the same way, someone who's really talented at the accordion might never in a million years sit down at a computer and pump out a really great EDM song because the necessary skills for each only intersect so much.

Marrow Machines · « **Reply #20 on:** February 19, 2016, 10:02:59 pm »

Quote from: Nadav on February 19, 2016, 07:06:31 pm

In the same way, someone who's really talented at the accordion might never in a million years sit down at a computer and pump out a really great EDM song because the necessary skills for each only intersect so much.

lol my brother plays a german diatonic accordion.

You also have to have a desire to sit down and realize this is a skill you want, that's what those young kids have decided for themselves a lot earlier than what you may have. So you're at a disadvantage because you were still poopin your pants while they were poopin in their pants and reading mozart or what ever.

Talent definitely comes from a physical perspective, the manifestation of time spent at a skill, and the ability to adapt to change.

Lydian · « **Reply #21 on:** February 20, 2016, 02:24:49 am »

Regarding talent I remember reading a book when I was 16 called the talent code by Daniel coyle. The entire theme of the book was regarding whether talent existed or whether it was related to other factors. He examined world class musicians, athletes, chess players, and what he found was a very specific set of variables that led to them all achieving their amount of skill.

I cant remember it directly but he found that one of the big differences was deliberate practice for at least 3 hours a day over the course of 10 years. That was enough to reach the 10,000 hours. He made sure to differentiate between normal practice and deliberate practice.

He also found something about the environment of these experts. Something along the lines of a poor environment being better than a good environment because it motivated them more to practice to escape their poor environments.

I cant remember it very clearly and I don't wanna say something that Daniel coyle didn't say but it was an interesting read.

I dont even remember if the author was Daniel coyle but the book name is accurat.

vinceasot · « **Reply #22 on:** February 20, 2016, 03:12:59 am »

learn from people who are smarter and better than you

be a sponge and soak in all the knowledge you can

practice and learn how a piece of music is made

and just have fun..while you're at it

Marrow Machines · « **Reply #23 on:** February 20, 2016, 04:48:16 am »

Quote from: Lydian on February 20, 2016, 02:24:49 am

He also found something about the environment of these experts. Something along the lines of a poor environment being better than a good environment because it motivated them more to practice to escape their poor environments.

Miyamoto Musashi, a Japanese swords man, suggests that you train in unconventional places to gain a better understanding in fighting in poor conditions.

It only makes you stronger if you make music in not the best environment or using the best gear initially, but depending on how serious you want to take this, you'll need to look at things from a different more precise manner. And that coincides with the deliberate practice as well.

Lydian · « **Reply #24 on:** February 20, 2016, 07:23:15 am »

Quote from: Marrow Machines on February 20, 2016, 04:48:16 am

Miyamoto Musashi, a Japanese swords man, suggests that you train in unconventional places to gain a better understanding in fighting in poor conditions.

It only makes you stronger if you make music in not the best environment or using the best gear initially, but depending on how serious you want to take this, you'll need to look at things from a different more precise manner. And that coincides with the deliberate practice as well.

Oddly enough, I've read his book of five rings a year ago ahahaha! Forgot about it but it does seem to make sense.

Marrow Machines · « **Reply #25 on:** February 20, 2016, 03:20:33 pm »

Quote from: Lydian on February 20, 2016, 07:23:15 am

Quote from: Marrow Machines on February 20, 2016, 04:48:16 am

Miyamoto Musashi, a Japanese swords man, suggests that you train in unconventional places to gain a better understanding in fighting in poor conditions.

It only makes you stronger if you make music in not the best environment or using the best gear initially, but depending on how serious you want to take this, you'll need to look at things from a different more precise manner. And that coincides with the deliberate practice as well.

Oddly enough, I've read his book of five rings a year ago ahahaha! Forgot about it but it does seem to make sense.

it should make sense, because he spoke of a way of life.

he also mentions how he takes carpentry skills to use with his sword style and philosophy.

it's also considered the business man's bible.

Mussar · « **Reply #26 on:** February 20, 2016, 07:53:39 pm »

Here's my routine for the periods between semesters when I have whole day chunks I can set aside for a specific regiment of practice or study. The general format is two days of practice and experimentation, two days of composition and production. Allow yourself at least an hour for any one kind of activity (I might start shifting the routine I wrote down after this current semester ends to better reflect that as well), and try to let yourself wear different hats at different times. I try to keep the sort of note taking and critical analysis practice separate from the more free roaming experiential practice, just like I try to keep my engineering separate from my songwriting.

The most important things to remember are direction and persistence: If you're not doing it regularly you're gonna forget stuff and lose muscle memory and you'll keep wasting time relearning stuff instead of learning new stuff, and if you don't have some sort of routine or syllabus to follow along you'll end up feeling discouraged by just how much stuff you don't know. The more you break stuff down into smaller steps that lead to a greater whole, the easier the process becomes - it just becomes even more boring and pedantic because you're practicing thirty simple tasks instead of five extremely difficult ones. So stay focused and eventually whatever you were working at will seem as easy as breathing.

ZAU · « **Reply #27 on:** February 22, 2016, 03:18:09 am »

I'm another person who believes that there's there's no such thing in 'talent'. No one is born being able to do anything.. you might be born with an affinity towards something but you still have to put in the hard work. If you like music, then you will naturally want to learn it. I do however believe in 'luck' and good timing though.

Nadav · « **Reply #28 on:** February 22, 2016, 05:04:50 pm »

Quote from: ZAU on February 22, 2016, 03:18:09 am

I'm another person who believes that there's there's no such thing in 'talent'. No one is born being able to do anything.. you might be born with an affinity towards something but you still have to put in the hard work. If you like music, then you will naturally want to learn it. I do however believe in 'luck' and good timing though.

I wouldn't believe in talent either if I thought it meant being born already able to do something. Have you had any kids? When they're born they can hardly even stay awake, let alone "do" anything. But, that's not what talent means. I think the definition I gave before is good:

Quote from: Nadav on February 19, 2016, 02:30:19 am

Talent = genetically inherited trait or set of traits that give someone an advantage at some activity

Author Topic: What's The Most Efficient Practice Method? (Read 22008 times)

Bertie South

Re: What's The Most Efficient Practice Method?

Nadav

Re: What's The Most Efficient Practice Method?

Bertie South

Re: What's The Most Efficient Practice Method?

Marrow Machines

Re: What's The Most Efficient Practice Method?

Nadav

Re: What's The Most Efficient Practice Method?

Marrow Machines

Re: What's The Most Efficient Practice Method?

Lydian

Re: What's The Most Efficient Practice Method?

vinceasot

Re: What's The Most Efficient Practice Method?

Marrow Machines

Re: What's The Most Efficient Practice Method?

Lydian

Re: What's The Most Efficient Practice Method?

Marrow Machines

Re: What's The Most Efficient Practice Method?

Mussar

Re: What's The Most Efficient Practice Method?

ZAU

Re: What's The Most Efficient Practice Method?

Nadav

Re: What's The Most Efficient Practice Method?